Overview
Liam is a door tenant at 5SAH and a member of our family law team. Liam practices from Deans Court Chambers, Manchester. Liam specialises exclusively in Family Law. He is recognised in Chambers and Partners 2024 as “Up and Coming” with an impressive and growing practice in family law.
Liam specialises in private children proceedings and financial remedy proceedings.
Liam was shortlisted for Family Law Young Barrister of the Year in 2021, Young Pro Bono Barrister of the Year in 2022 and 2024, and Barrister of the Year 2024 in the inaugural Manchester Resolution Awards.
He has been recognised as a Leading Junior in the 2024 inaugural listing of leading Manchester Children Law Barristers by Doyles.
Family & Children & International Family
Children Law
In his children practice, Liam acts for parents and children (through their Children’s Guardian) in private law proceedings and is regularly instructed in respect of children’s living arrangements involving allegations of parental alienation, domestic and sexual abuse, specific issues with regards to schooling, travel overseas, immunisations and relocation both at home and abroad. Liam has also been instructed to appear in the High Court in respect of international abduction proceedings, matters invoking the Inherent Jurisdiction in respect of medical treatment and appeals from the Family Court.
Financial Remedies
In his financial remedy practice, Liam represents parties and intervenors in proceedings involving the distribution of assets following the breakdown of a relationship. He regularly undertakes FDA’s, FDR’s and Final Hearings, as well as interlocutory applications for Maintenance Pending Suit, Legal Services Provision Orders, Disclosure Orders, as well as proceedings for enforcement and reviewable dispositions. Liam is a regular contributor to the Financial Remedies Journal.
Appointments
- Attorney General’s Junior Junior Barrister Scheme
- Advocate (Formerly the Bar Pro Bono Unit)
- Associate of the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators
Awards
- Young Pro Bono Barrister of the Year 2024 (Shortlisted) - Advocate
- Barrister of the Year 2024 (Shortlisted) - Manchester Resolution Awards
- Pegasus Scholarship 2023 – The Honourable Society of the Inner Temple
- Young Pro Bono Barrister of the Year 2022 (Shortlisted) - Advocate
- Family Law Young Barrister of the Year 2021 (Shortlisted) – Lexis Nexis
- William James and Mary Spence Award – University of Leeds
- Major Scholarship – The Honourable Society of the Inner Temple
- Duke of Edinburgh Entrance Award - The Honourable Society of the Inner Temple
- Advocacy Scholarship – BPP University Law School
- Regional Programme Leaders Scholarship – BPP University Law School
Education
- University of Leeds – LLB (Hons) Law
- LLM Legal Practice incorporating the BPTC – Distinction
Professional Memberships
- The Honourable Society of the Inner Temple
- Northern Circuit
- Family Law Bar Association
- Chartered Institute of Arbitrators
Cases of Note
Re T (Children: Publication of Judgment) [2024] EWCA Civ 697
Liam, led by Michael Jones KC, represented the respondent father. The mother appealed the decision of Arbuthnot J to publish the parties’ names once the youngest child, T, turned 18 in August 2026. The Court allowed the appeal; a fair balance could not be struck between the rights and interests engaged when publication would be 2 years from now. Maria Scotland appeared for the appellant mother.
T (A Child) (No.2) (Transparency: Publication of the Party’s Names) [2024] EWHC 161 (Fam) (2 February 2024)
The Court determined the public interest in identifying the parents outweighed the Article 8 rights of the mother and children who opposed unanonymised publication. The Court considered publication to be consistent with the children’s best interests as it would allow them to gain full insight into the case, with which to make informed choices in the future. The impact on their right to respect for their private lives is relatively limited. In contrast, the public interest in publication identifying the parents is significant. Liam represented the father, led by Michael Jones KC.
Re T (A CHILD)(s9(6) Children Act 1989 orders: Exceptional Circumstances: Parental Alienation) [2024] EWHC 59 (Fam)
Liam was instructed by the father to represent him at a rehearing of his application following an appeal. Proceedings had been ongoing for over 10 years, and significant findings of parental alienation had been made against the mother. At first instance, a Circuit Judge had found the matter to be exceptional and considered the child arrangements order should continue until T reached 18. At the rehearing, the Court determined that whilst the proceedings were exceptional, the Court did not consider it could go against the wishes and feelings of T, now aged 15, when he expressed he did not wish to spend time with his father. Liam was led by Michael Jones KC at the hearing.
A Borough Council v E and Others (No.2) (Refusal of Secure Accommodation Order)[2021] EWHC 2699 (Fam)
Liam was instructed by the local authority, led by Peter Rothery, in respect of a renewed application for a secure accommodation order pursuant to S.25 of the Children Act 1989.
D (A Child) [2021] EWCA Civ 787
Liam was instructed to represent a Mother with learning disabilities in care proceedings following the birth of her child. On behalf of the Mother, Liam opposed the Local Authority care plan to separate the Mother from the child. The Court having made the decision to separate, and placing the child into foster care, Liam sought an urgent stay in the Court of Appeal, the same being granted. An application for permission to appeal and to appeal the decision to separate was made and subsequently heard on an urgent basis, Liam now being led by Julia Cheetham KC at the substantive hearing. The Court of Appeal granted permission and allowed the appeal.
A Borough Council v E and Others [2021] EWHC 183 (Fam)
Liam was instructed by the Local Authority in care proceedings with regards to a child with complex mental health needs subject to Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards Orders. Later led by Julia Cheetham KC, the Local Authority sought approval of the Court to place the child in an unregulated placement whilst subject to Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards Orders remained and OFSTED regulation was sought.
